Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
We have applied the optimal estimator for fNLˡᵒᶜᵃˡ to the 5 year WMAP data. Marginalizing over the amplitude of foreground templates we get -4 < fNLˡᵒᶜᵃˡ < 80 at 95% CL. Error bars of previous (sub-optimal) analyses are roughly 40% larger than these. The probability that a Gaussian simulation, analyzed using our estimator, gives a result larger in magnitude than the one we find is 7%. Our pipeline gives consistent results when applied to the three and five year WMAP data releases and agrees well with the results from our own sub-optimal pipeline. We find no evidence of any residual foreground contamination.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Smith et al. (2009) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: